"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Americanist

 

Actually I'm a bit of a nerd. I love reading books on university level math and science in my free time. Please teacher, I would like that outline, on how EXACTLY this can be applied in science. You see there were these claims about a grand unified theory, how this was science, etcetera, but all I saw was a math game involving cross-addition of digits with absolutely no rigor. I failed to see any proof of his metaphysical claims of time and energy from a vacuum. It was thoroughly unscientific, and he seemed to use a lot of fancy words that confuses laymen in an unscientific manner.

Quick and to the point then I have to run for a bit...

The applications are endless from controlling elements via structural changes to harnessing energy. How is math and science not applied to a Unified Theory? Put in proper context this brand of math is its own code - programming language.

The video you're watching was early 90's. Here's a good place to start:

Platonic Solids - Take particular notice of how vector based structures beget like shapes
1,4,7 - 2,5,8 - Plot these as coordinates for an actualization of 3 dimensional spatial reality
Swastika - A primitive schematic of two opposing forces creating spun density out of energy wells (the voided spaces adjacent - 90 degrees to lines).

reply to post by Americanist
If I might make an observation... you seem to have rather badly misunderstood the word EXACTLY.

Virtually all the other words as well, but that one in particular. It's emphasized for a reason (the reason being to try to discourage you from responding with a load of chaotic, vague, meaningless babble and actually answer the question). Try again?

Originally posted by Bobathon
reply to post by Americanist

 

If I might make an observation... you seem to have rather badly misunderstood the word EXACTLY.

Virtually all the other words as well, but that one in particular. It's emphasized for a reason (the reason being to try to discourage you from responding with a load of chaotic, vague, meaningless babble and actually answer the question). Try again?

That's right up your alley, hence, I shall don you with a new name... Babblethon. No, what's tanking badly is your slighted comprehension set.

reply to post by Americanist


I still don't see how playing with digits proves energy can be harnessed from a vacuum. He didn't even show how he derived his infamous diagram and how it models reality. He just pointed out patterns in how cross-adding works and started gibbering on about time.

Again, show me exactly how his discourse or findings will lead to all the wild things he claimed. Be specific this time.

Originally posted by Americanist

That's right up your alley, hence, I shall don you with a new name... Babblethon.

Thanks, A. That's very sweet of you.

I can see that our conversations are going to be very enlightening.

Ok, I'll just wait here until someone with the capacity for thought decides to contribute. Don't mind me.

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Americanist

 

I still don't see how playing with digits proves energy can be harnessed from a vacuum. He didn't even show how he derived his infamous diagram and how it models reality. He just pointed out patterns in how cross-adding works and started gibbering on about time.

Again, show me exactly how his discourse or findings will lead to all the wild things he claimed. Be specific this time.

edit on 15-2-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

It's becoming highly unfortunate you don't have a background in sound or electrical engineering. In fact, I take it you lack skills in software and web development too? Double whammy, if that's the case.

Start with the aforementioned then gravitate towards Tesla, Stubblefield, and Keely. Tom Bearden offers up a crash course on electrical systems. You'll have to work your way up to Rodin's contribution afterwards.

Originally posted by Bobathon

Originally posted by Americanist

That's right up your alley, hence, I shall don you with a new name... Babblethon.

Thanks, A. That's very sweet of you.

I can see that our conversations are going to be very enlightening.

Ok, I'll just wait here until someone with the capacity for thought decides to contribute. Don't mind me.

I'm known for both my kindness and wit. Mind? Not at all... I'll help you find yours and apply some common sense. Say the word. Until then...

Tata,
A

reply to post by Americanist


Since you understand it explain it in simple words. I know how to program, but I do not see how this can lead to free energy. Simply having a pattern for digits does not mean energy comes from a vacuum. These patterns might help in certain topics in computer science, but the continuum of real numbers is non-rational. If you understand it, explain it. If you don't, point made.

If your cop-out is it's too complicated for me or others, you are underestimating us or just cannot produce.

Bobathon, awesome blog post. I just found it on Google. Perhaps you can better explain why this is all a pile of BS.

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Americanist

 

Since you understand it explain it in simple words. I know how to program, but I do not see how this can lead to free energy. Simply having a pattern for digits does not mean energy comes from a vacuum. These patterns might help in certain topics in computer science, but the continuum of real numbers is non-rational. If you understand it, explain it. If you don't, point made.

Your best bet is to dissociate 1 - 9 and symbols. To be crystal clear... These symbols are a language to author code base. Out of code base we arrive at platforms. These platforms are the vacuum whereby mass - spun density is continuously worked, assembled, and reassembled. I write in relationship to your personal experience, so the only hindrance is your breadth of learning thus far.

So tell me, what are your accomplishments using binary code? How about recording for example... On/Off. Taken to the next level... How about using code mirroring nature? Now nothing is beyond the limit.

Simple answer: The same reason you're grappling with electricity is why you're unable to grasp free.

Originally posted by 547000
Bobathon, awesome blog post. I just found it on Google. Perhaps you can better explain why this is all a pile of BS.

Thanks

I would, but there's nothing to get hold of, just wordsoup. If someone can point to something that they believe his theories imply, in language that they haven't just made up, that would be interesting.

So far all I can say is that Rodin doesn't appear to realise that he's misusing virtually every word he says, and that everyone who doesn't like to see him called a nutjob appears to have the same problem. So far all I see is a complete content vacuum.

What he does demonstrate is that like vacuum-minded people definitely attract rather than repel each other, and that the bollocks-propagation energy of the content vacuum can yield an apparently unlimited capacity for the generation of free money, even in a recession. Which is very interesting.

Originally posted by Americanist
To be crystal clear... These symbols are a language to author code base. Out of code base we arrive at platforms. These platforms are the vacuum whereby mass - spun density is continuously worked, assembled, and reassembled.

I mean, what can one say. It defies belief.

reply to post by Americanist


Well, obviously 0-9 are symbols. Ten symbols because of base ten. So you don't have to worry about that. What you do have to worry about is talking in concrete terms. How EXACTLY does knowing that 2^(n-1) = n when the digits add up and other things like that harness energy from a vacuum. You're an engineer, and engineers are pretty well known to be bad at abstract math, so please, by all means, be concrete here. It's becoming quite obvious you're not able to explain any concrete uses for Rodin's "scientific" insight so you'd rather throw technical gobbligook to cover your tracks.

I've written programs which manipulate binary code. It's not really complicated at all.

reply to post by Bobathon

I would, but there's nothing to get hold of, just wordsoup. If someone can point to something that they believe his theories imply, in language that they haven't just made up, that would be interesting.

He is trying to map the 'grain' of the wave structure of space-time. He is trying to quantize and model the emerging harmonics or ratios of space-time. To map the inherent motion of continuum mechanics. To show the discrete frequencies and wavelengths of ZPE cymatics in space.

Something along those lines.

For now, forget that it sounds like bollocks, but try to understand what I am saying to you.

I am using the words very deliberately. We do not have very many good terms to describe what I am trying to say, because we have not developed them yet - which is part of our problem and why it is hard to conceive of this idea. Language and cognition are interrelated.

I genuinely understand the 'pseudo-scientific jargon' of Rodin, because I am familiar with the academic context of mysticism and alchemy and occult philosophy. I understand what he is trying to say in that context. So many other people I have studied have trouble getting difficult concepts to propagate intersubjectively. Rodin just happens to be especially bad at it because he was not formally programmed.

BTW, once you are through with Rodin... Keely, Searl, Milo Wolff etc. will still be there waiting for you to question their mental faculties.

Keely made a whole new set of terms in order to better explain the laws allowing his machines to work.

reply to post by Bobathon

Originally posted by Americanist
To be crystal clear... These symbols are a language to author code base. Out of code base we arrive at platforms. These platforms are the vacuum whereby mass - spun density is continuously worked, assembled, and reassembled.

I mean, what can one say. It defies belief.

codebase
platform

'platforms are the vacuum' = structure of the vacuum

'whereby mass or "spun density" is continuously worked, assembled, and reassembled.' = whereby organized geometry of nature arises in specific patterns

Am I correct in interpreting you this way, Americanist?

Originally posted by beebs

I would, but there's nothing to get hold of, just wordsoup. If someone can point to something that they believe his theories imply, in language that they haven't just made up, that would be interesting.

He is trying to map the 'grain' of the wave structure of space-time. He is trying to quantize and model the emerging harmonics or ratios of space-time. To map the inherent motion of continuum mechanics. To show the discrete frequencies and wavelengths of ZPE cymatics in space.

Something along those lines.

For now, forget that it sounds like bollocks, but try to understand what I am saying to you.

If you're using words but you can't tell anyone what it means, it's not really any form of communication.

reply to post by Bobathon

If you're using words but you can't tell anyone what it means, it's not really any form of communication.

wtf.

If you are reading words you don't understand, then ask for specific clarification. I am under the impression that you are familiar with those words.

Communication is 2 ways buddy.

reply to post by beebs
The words are fine. It's the way you put them together that's the problem. Blaming the person you're communicating with doesn't help.

Ok, let's try something. If you can communicate without continually trying to make personal comments about me, then I will communicate without making personal comments about you. I'd prefer that. Deal?

To me, a theory is not a theory of reality unless there is a solid, explainable connection between the concepts of the theory and the reality of the observable world. Would you agree?

If you agree, then I'd like you to explain what you've just said in terms of how it relates Rodin's ideas to something observable in the world.

Start with something that is clearly Rodin's idea, follow it through step by step, and connect it with something that can be observed in the real world. If any of the steps are unclear, I'll ask for clarification.

How's that sound?

I'm listening to an MP3 of an interview of Rodin by Bill Alek of the Vortex Network New Technology Hour which is on the achieveradio.com website. The interview took place July 25, 2009.

I see on this page a link to "The Rodin coil test."

Originally posted by Americanist
The Universe is the "deal." The complete stack of cards or a stage - if you will.

I'm sorry but you didn't explain how you "deal in wave function". What's more, not all phenomena are modeled best with wave functions. What does Rodin have to do with wave functions anyhow? All he produced is a giant sudoku, a W-like symbol and surely a lot of nonsense how painting numbers on a donut produces a vortex and a black hole.

Your pitfall is expounding terminology:

a : to divide into triangles
b : to give triangular form to

"My pitfall"? Phew... Give me a break. You keep typing nonsense faster than people have their fill of laughs reading it. Let me repeat what you said:

I'm sure you've heard the term triangulate. This is how energy is compressed into mass on myriad scale.

I think there is a Rodin syndrome that is similar or identical to:
en.wikipedia.org...

When used in a specifically psychiatric context, it labels a morbid mental condition which results in writing rambling and confused statements, often degenerating in a meaningless succession words or even nonsense and called then graphorrhea

I think that "triangulation compressing energy at myriad scale" fits the definition of graphorrhea perfectly.